[GTC Spoilers] Color Identity and Reminder text

37 posts / 0 new
Last post
can this go into a mono-black commander deck?

IMAGE(http://media.wizards.com/images/magic/tcg/products/gtc/5atfjinpng_en.jpg)
proud member of the 2011 community team
Yes.

903.4. The Commander variant uses color identity to determine what cards can be in a deck with a certain commander. The color identity of a card is the color or colors of any mana symbols in that card’s mana cost or rules text, plus any colors defined by its characteristic-defining abilities (see rule 604.3) or color indicator (see rule 204).

903.4b Reminder text is ignored when determining a card’s color identity. See rule 207.2.
That makes no sense to me.

If they spelled the ability out on the card in full then it would not be allowed in a mono-black Commander deck, but because they used a keyword to save space it is allowed?

~ Tim   
I am Blue/White Reached DCI Rating 1800 on 28/10/11. :D
Sig
56287226 wrote:
190106923 wrote:
Not bad. But what happens flavor wise when one kamahl kills the other one?
Zis iz a sign uf deep psychological troma, buried in zer subconscious mind. By keelink himzelf, Kamahl iz physically expressink hiz feelinks uf self-disgust ova hiz desire for hiz muzzer. [/GermanPsychologistVoice]
56957928 wrote:
57799958 wrote:
That makes no sense to me. If they spelled the ability out on the card in full then it would not be allowed in a mono-black Commander deck, but because they used a keyword to save space it is allowed? ~ Tim
Yup, just like you can have Birds of paradise in a mono green deck but not Noble Hierarch. YAY COLOR IDENTITY
56287226 wrote:
56888618 wrote:
Is algebra really that difficult?
Survey says yes.
56883218 wrote:
57799958 wrote:
You want to make a milky drink. You squeeze a cow.
I love this description. Like the cows are sponges filled with milk. I can see it all Nick Parks claymation-style with the cow's eyes bugging out momentarily as a giant farmer squeezes it like a squeaky dog toy, and milk shoots out of it.
56287226 wrote:
56735468 wrote:
And no judge will ever give you a game loss for playing snow covered lands.
I now have a new goal in life. ;)
the color identity rule doesn't make sense on many levels
proud member of the 2011 community team
That's how the rules are currently. Maybe they'll change them with the release of Gatecrash, as I don't know of any other keyword ability that has a colored symbol.
So we are saying that even though the rules text of the keyword ability contains a mana symbol, and the card has that ability, the card does not have the rules text of that ability?

That seems like trying to say that the equip ability doesn't target because the text on the card doesn't say it does.
So we are saying that even though the rules text of the keyword ability contains a mana symbol, and the card has that ability, the card does not have the rules text of that ability?

Yes, in much the same way that Mind Bend can't change what Fear does. Keywords can and do remove text from a card.
That seems like trying to say that the equip ability doesn't target because the text on the card doesn't say it does.

The ability still targets, but the card doesn't have the word "target" in its rules text.
903.4b Reminder text is ignored when determining a card’s color identity. See rule 207.2.

Yes, but "Extort" can't be ignored.  At this moment, Keyword Abilities (as opposed to Keyword Actions) are fully replaceable with the text they are defined to "mean"*, so I forsee a rule clarifying that the text of keyword abilities counts towards the card's text for EDH's color identity. We'll have to wait and see to be sure, though.

* — Nothing says "Whenever a player {keyword ability}s, ..." or "If a player were to {keyword ability}, he ... instead."
How could this be true?
How could what be true?
Extort cards aren't the only cards that bring up this issue:

Charmed Pendant can go in any EDH deck.

Eye of Ramos can only go in blue EDH decks.

And cyphern mentioned the functional change brought by "fear".
Those two are very different than Extort, and very easily answered.

Charmed Pendant's symbols are found in reminder text [CR 207.2a], which has "no game function" [CR 207.2].

The mana symbol appears twice in Eye of Ramos's text, so I have no idea why it was brought up.
The EDH rules committee has said it works, for now.

They may change the color identity rules at the next update.
The EDH rules committee has said it works, for now.

I don't doubt you, but do you have a link for that?

Nothing says "Whenever a player {keyword ability}s, ..." or "If a player were to {keyword ability}, he ... instead."


Astral Slide

Rules Advisor

Please autocard: [c]Shard Phoenix[/c] = Shard Phoenix.

903.4b Reminder text is ignored when determining a card’s color identity. See rule 207.2.

Yes, but "Extort" can't be ignored.  At this moment, Keyword Abilities (as opposed to Keyword Actions) are fully replaceable with the text they are defined to "mean"*, so I forsee a rule clarifying that the text of keyword abilities counts towards the card's text for EDH's color identity. We'll have to wait and see to be sure, though.

* — Nothing says "Whenever a player {keyword ability}s, ..." or "If a player were to {keyword ability}, he ... instead."



This isn't right. If something has a keyword ability in its rules text, that means it has that keyword ability. It doesn't instead or also have the spelled-out equivalent.

In several cases, the keyword isn't just a replacement for a spelled-out ability. First strike and haste, for example, don't have a spelled-out equivalent.

For other keywords, there is a text that the keyword "means", but there are also additional rules to modify the behavior. For example, miracle has a rule saying how long the card stays revealed.

And there are many cases where having a specific keyword matters. Chub Toad's ability is exactly identical to bushido, but it won't get a boost from Takeno, Samurai General, even if it's somehow a Samurai. And if those Samurai instead had their spelled-out equivalent to bushido, they wouldn't get the bonus, either.

Also, Saproling Infestation does say "Whenever a player kicks a spell" (which only works when you cast a spell with its additional cost represented by the kicker keyword ability). There are also the terms devoured, prowl cost, and equip abilities. None of those would make sense if the cards had the spelled-out equivalents rather than the actual keywords.
Those two are very different than Extort, and very easily answered.

Charmed Pendant's symbols are found in reminder text [CR 207.2a], which has "no game function" [CR 207.2].



That same logic applies to extort.

The mana symbol appears twice in Eye of Ramos's text, so I have no idea why it was brought up.



Eye of Ramos was printed with the word "blue" in its text. It was errata'd to the mana symbol. It's another example to display an oddity that already exists with the color identity rules.
The EDH rules committee has said it works, for now.

I don't doubt you, but do you have a link for that?



forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?t...
In several cases, the keyword isn't just a replacement for a spelled-out ability. First strike and haste, for example, don't have a spelled-out equivalent.

So? That doesn't contradict what I said.

For other keywords, there is a text that the keyword "means", but there are also additional rules to modify the behavior. For example, miracle has a rule saying how long the card stays revealed.

muh. Unimpressed.

And there are many cases where having a specific keyword matters. Chub Toad's ability is exactly identical to bushido, but it won't get a boost from Takeno, Samurai General

Ok, now you've found something that contradicts what I said. Thanks, I've been hunting for one.

Those two are very different than Extort, and very easily answered.

Charmed Pendant's symbols are found in reminder text [CR 207.2a], which has "no game function" [CR 207.2].

That same logic applies to extort.

That's completely false. It's even an outright lie, I dare say. Both Extort and the rules for Extort have a game function, and you know it.

The mana symbol appears twice in Eye of Ramos's text, so I have no idea why it was brought up.

Eye of Ramos was printed with the word "blue" in its text. It was errata'd to the mana symbol. It's another example to display an oddity that already exists with the color identity rules.

No, it's not. Identity looks at the card's text, not the text printed on the card. In fact, nothing in MTG looks at the text printed on the card. Nothing exceptional about Eye of Ramos.

forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?t...

Thanks!
Both Extort and the rules for Extort have a game function, and you know it.

No one is claiming that extort has no game function. It's the reminder text of extort that has no game function.
No one is claiming that extort has no game function.

KyCygni did. He said the same logic that concluded the text that contained the symbol had no game function applied to Extort. Said text is the rules, and the rules do have a game function.

It's the reminder text of extort that has no game function.

The reminder text of Crypt Ghast, you mean. We know the reminder text of cards doesn't matter. We're talking about whether Extort's symbol matters.

Saying it doesn't matter because it doesn't matter for Charmed Pendant is an invalid argument. The situation is quite different.

That's completely false. It's even an outright lie, I dare say. Both Extort and the rules for Extort have a game function, and you know it.

We're not talking about the rules text for Extort, we're talking about the reminder text in the card's text box.

Like all other italicised text in a card's text box - flavour text and ability words - reminder text has no rules meaning whatsoever.
207.2. The text box may also contain italicized text that has no game function.

207.2a Reminder text is italicized text within parentheses that summarizes a rule that applies to that card. It usually appears on the same line as the ability it’s relevant to, but it may appear on its own line if it applies to an aspect of the card other than an ability.

207.2b Flavor text is italicized text that, like the illustration, adds artistic appeal to the game. It appears below the rules text. 207.2c An ability word appears in italics at the beginning of some abilities. Ability words are similar to keywords in that they tie together cards that have similar functionality, but they have no special rules meaning and no individual entries in the Comprehensive Rules. The ability words are channel, chroma, domain, fateful hour, grandeur, hellbent, imprint, join forces, kinship, landfall, metalcraft, morbid, radiance, sweep, and threshold.



The fact is that, ath the moment, the card's rules text is considered to be the keyword, and not the CR definition attached to that keyword.  This is why you can't Mind Bend the colour word on Fear - because it doesn't have one.

Finally, we don't have the CR definition of Extort yet, so we can't be sure whether the mana symbol appears in the rules definition of Extort.
Still blessed by Julia of Hillsdown. M:tG Rules Adviser You are Red/Blue!
You are Red/Blue!
Take The Magic Dual Colour Test - Beta today!
Created with Rum and Monkey's Personality Test Generator.
Interestingly, Reach is a keyword with a function but with no rules meaning (they define it anyway, but they don't have to), while Flying and Pseudoflying have identical rules text but are functionally different.

Rules Advisor

Please autocard: [c]Shard Phoenix[/c] = Shard Phoenix.

Like all other italicised text in a card's text box - flavour text and ability words - reminder text has no rules meaning whatsoever.

I know. I said as much earlier.

That's completely false. It's even an outright lie, I dare say. Both Extort and the rules for Extort have a game function, and you know it.

We're not talking about the rules text for Extort, we're talking about the reminder text in the card's text box.

So for the third time, that's not true; there are issues with Crypt Ghast not present in Charmed Pendant. Now, did you actually want to add anything to the discussion?

Finally, we don't have the CR definition of Extort yet, so we can't be sure whether the mana symbol appears in the rules definition of Extort.

Poppycock. The symbol will necessarilly appear in the definition. Furthermore, not knowing the rule is irrelevant. We can discuss the consequences of the presense of the symbol in the rule whether it actually apears there or not.
EDIT: wow, ikegami, you edited your post about a half dozen times so far. I am responding to the part where you said reminder text has no effect.

Excellent we all agree that reminder text doesn't matter. Therefore, crypt ghast's color identity is black and only black (which is what the EDH rules council said too). 

I think that about covers it, unless we want to discuss whether the rules should be changed.
Excellent we all agree that reminder text doesn't matter. Therefore, crypt ghast's color identity is black and only black (which is what the EDH rules council said too).

Not at all. As I said before, it completely depends on whether there's a rule added that considers Extort's definitons's symbol or not. (yay, back to where we were in post #8!)

Not at all. As I said before, it completely depends on whether there's a rule added that considers Extort's definitons's symbol or not.

We know of no such rule, and the EDH rules council, which has been advising Matt Tabak, also knows of no such rule.

Would you like to discuss whether it's a good idea to add such a rule?
Not at all. As I said before, it completely depends on whether there's a rule added that considers Extort's definitons's symbol or not.

We know of no such rule, and the EDH rules council, which has been advising Matt Tabak, also knows of no such rule.

Would you like to discuss whether it's a good idea to add such a rule?


If you do want to discuss rules changes, please start a thread in RT&T.  I think the current discussion has gone beyond RQ&A, and we already have the answer to the question that started the thread.
 
We know of no such rule

You mean "We don't know there will be such a rule", which is as true as "We don't know that there won't be one."

I do think it less likely than when I thought there was no precedent for Keyword Abilities being different than the abilities they represent (when they represent abilities).

Would you like to discuss whether it's a good idea to add such a rule?

Not really. Rule theory is for another forum, but I won't complain if you state your opinion.

That makes no sense to me.

If they spelled the ability out on the card in full then it would not be allowed in a mono-black Commander deck, but because they used a keyword to save space it is allowed?

~ Tim   


Yup, just like you can have Birds of paradise in a mono green deck but not Noble Hierarch. YAY COLOR IDENTITY

Zammm = Batman.

It's my sig in a box
58280208 wrote:
Everything is better when you read it in Bane's voice.
192334281 wrote:
Your human antics and desire to continue living have moved me. Just kidding. You cannot move me physically or emotionally. Wall humor.
57092228 wrote:
Copy effects work like a photocopy machine: you get a copy of the 'naked' card, NOT of what's on it.
56995928 wrote:
Funny story: InQuest Magazine (I think it was InQuest) had an oversized Chaos Orb which I totally rooked someone into allowing into a (non-sanctioned) game. I had a proxy card that was a Mountain with "Chaos Orb" written on it. When I played it, my opponent cried foul: Him: "WTF? a Proxy? no-one said anything about Proxies. Do you even own an actual Chaos Orb?" Me: "Yes, but I thought it would be better to use a Proxy." Him: "No way. If you're going to put a Chaos Orb in your deck you have to use your actual Chaos Orb." Me: "*Sigh*. Okay." I pulled out this huge Chaos Orb and placed it on the table. He tried to cry foul again but everyone else said he insisted I use my actual Chaos Orb and that was my actual Chaos Orb. I used it, flipped it and wiped most of his board. Unsurprisingly, that only worked once and only because everyone present thought it was hilarious.
My DM on Battleminds:
no, see i can kill defenders, but 8 consecutive crits on a battlemind, eh walk it off.
144543765 wrote:
195392035 wrote:
Hi guys! So, I'm a sort of returning player to Magic. I say sort of because as a child I had two main TCG's I liked. Yu-Gi-Oh, and Pokemon. Some of my friends branched off in to Magic, and I bought two pre-made decks just to kind of fit in. Like I said, Yu-Gi-Oh and Pokemon were what I really knew how to play. I have a extensive knowledge of deck building in those two TCG's. However, as far as Magic is concerned, I only ever used those two pre made decks. I know how the game is played, and I know general things, but now I want to get in the game for real. I want to begin playing it as a regular. My question is, are all cards ever released from the time of the inception of this game until present day fair game in a deck? Or are there special rules? Are some cards forbidden or restricted? Thanks guys, and I will gladly accept ANY help lol.
I have the same problem with women.
117639611 wrote:
198869283 wrote:
Oh I have a standing rule. If someone plays a Planeswalker I concede the game. I refuse to play with or against people who play Planeswalkers. They really did ruin the game.
A turn two Tibalt win?! Wicked... Betcha don't see that everyday.

The Pony Co. 

Is this my new ego sig? Yes it is, other Barry
57461258 wrote:
And that's why you should never, ever call RP Jesus on being a troll, because then everyone else playing along gets outed, too, and the thread goes back to being boring.
57461258 wrote:
See, this is why RPJesus should be in charge of the storyline. The novel line would never have been cancelled if he had been running the show. Specifically the Slobad and Geth's Head talkshow he just described.
57461258 wrote:
Not only was that an obligatory joke, it was an on-topic post that still managed to be off-topic due to thread derailment. RP Jesus does it again folks.
92481331 wrote:
I think I'm gonna' start praying to Jesus... That's right, RPJesus, I'm gonna' be praying to you, right now. O' Jesus Please continue to make my time here on the forums fun and cause me to chuckle. Amen.
92481331 wrote:
56957928 wrote:
It was wonderful. Us Johnnies had a field day. That Timmy with the Grizzly bears would actually have to think about swinging into your Mogg Fanatic, giving you time to set up your silly combo. Nowadays it's all DERPSWING! with thier blue jeans and their MP3 players and their EM EM OH AR PEE JEES and their "Dewmocracy" and their children's card games and their Jersey Shores and their Tattooed Tenaged Vampire Hunters from Beverly Hills
Seriously, that was amazing. I laughed my *ss off. Made my day, and I just woke up.
[quote=ArtVenn You're still one of my favorite people... just sayin'.[/quote]
56756068 wrote:
56786788 wrote:
.....would it be a bit blasphemous if I said, "PRAYSE RPJAYSUS!" like an Evangelical preacher?
Perhaps, but who doesn't like to blaspheme every now and again? Especially when Mr. RPJesus is completely right.
56756068 wrote:
I don't say this often, but ... LOL
57526128 wrote:
You... You... Evil something... I actualy made the damn char once I saw the poster... Now you made me see it again and I gained resolve to put it into my campaign. Shell be high standing oficial of Cyrix order. Uterly mad and only slightly evil. And it'll be bad. Evil even. And ill blame you and Lizard for it :P.
57042968 wrote:
111809331 wrote:
I'm trying to work out if you're being sarcastic here. ...
Am going to stop you right there... it's RPJesus... he's always sarcastic
58335208 wrote:
56957928 wrote:
112114441 wrote:
we can only hope it gets the jace treatment...it could have at least been legendary
So that even the decks that don't run it run it to deal with it? Isn't that like the definition of format warping?
I lol'd.
56287226 wrote:
98088088 wrote:
Uktabi Orangutan What the heck's going on with those monkeys?
The most common answer is that they are what RPJesus would call "[Debutantes avert your eyes]ing."
56965458 wrote:
Show
57461258 wrote:
116498949 wrote:
I’ve removed content from this thread because off-topic discussions are a violation of the Code of Conduct. You can review the Code here: www.wizards.com/Company/About.aspx?x=wz_... Please keep your posts polite, on-topic, and refrain from making personal attacks. You are welcome to disagree with one another but please do so respectfully and constructively. If you wish to report a post for Code of Conduct violation, click on the “Report Post” button above the post and this will submit your report to the moderators on duty.
...Am I the only one that thinks this is reaching the point of downright Kafkaesque insanity?
I condone the use of the word Kafkaesque. However, I'm presentely ambivalent. I mean, that can't be serious, right? We're April 1st, right? They didn't mod RPJesus for off-topic discussion when the WHOLE THREAD IS OFF-TOPIC, right? Right.
57545908 wrote:
56957928 wrote:
Save or die. If you disagree with this, you're wrong (Not because of any points or arguements that have been made, but I just rolled a d20 for you and got a 1, so you lose).
58397368 wrote:
58222628 wrote:
This just won the argument, AFAIC.
That's just awesome.
57471038 wrote:
57718868 wrote:
HOW DID I NOT KNOW ABOUT THE BEAR PRODUCING WORDS OF WILDING?! WHAT IS WRONG WITH ME?!
That's what RPJesus tends to do. That's why I don't think he's a real person, but some Magic Card Archive Server sort of machine, that is programmed to react to other posters' comments with obscure cards that do in fact exist, but somehow missed by even the most experienced Magic players. And then come up with strange combos with said cards. All of that is impossible for a normal human to do given the amount of time he does it and how often he does it. He/It got me with Light of Sanction, which prompted me to go to RQ&A to try and find if it was even possible to do combat damage to a creature I control (in light that Mark of Asylum exists).
71235715 wrote:
+10
100176878 wrote:
56957928 wrote:
57078538 wrote:
heaven or hell.
Round 1. Lets rock.
GG quotes! RPJesus just made this thread win!
56906968 wrote:
56957928 wrote:
143359585 wrote:
Blue players get all the overpowerered cards like JTMS. I think it's time that wizards gave something to people who remember what magic is really about: creatures.
Initially yes, Wizards was married to blue. However, about a decade ago they had a nasty divorce, and a few years after that they began courting the attention of Green. Then in Worldwake they had a nasty affair with their ex, but as of Innistrad, things seem to have gotten back on track, and Wizards has even proposed.
You are my favorite. Yes you. And moments like this make it so. Thank you RPJesus for just being you.
On what flavor text fits me:
57307308 wrote:
Surely RPJesus gets Niv-Mizzet, Dracogenius?
56874518 wrote:
First: I STILL can't take you seriously with that avatar. And I can take RPJesus seriously, so that's saying something.
121689989 wrote:
I'd offer you a cookie for making me laugh but it has an Upkeep Cost that has been known to cause people to quit eating.
56267956 wrote:
I <3 you loads
57400888 wrote:
56957928 wrote:
"AINT NO LAWS IN THE SKY MOTHER****." - Agrus Kos, Wojek Veteran
10/10. Amazing.
903.4b Reminder text is ignored when determining a card’s color identity. See rule 207.2.

Yes, but "Extort" can't be ignored.  At this moment, Keyword Abilities (as opposed to Keyword Actions) are fully replaceable with the text they are defined to "mean"*, so I forsee a rule clarifying that the text of keyword abilities counts towards the card's text for EDH's color identity. We'll have to wait and see to be sure, though.

* — Nothing says "Whenever a player {keyword ability}s, ..." or "If a player were to {keyword ability}, he ... instead."



This isn't right. If something has a keyword ability in its rules text, that means it has that keyword ability. It doesn't instead or also have the spelled-out equivalent.

In several cases, the keyword isn't just a replacement for a spelled-out ability. First strike and haste, for example, don't have a spelled-out equivalent.

For other keywords, there is a text that the keyword "means", but there are also additional rules to modify the behavior. For example, miracle has a rule saying how long the card stays revealed.

And there are many cases where having a specific keyword matters. Chub Toad's ability is exactly identical to bushido, but it won't get a boost from Takeno, Samurai General, even if it's somehow a Samurai. And if those Samurai instead had their spelled-out equivalent to bushido, they wouldn't get the bonus, either.

Also, Saproling Infestation does say "Whenever a player kicks a spell" (which only works when you cast a spell with its additional cost represented by the kicker keyword ability). There are also the terms devoured, prowl cost, and equip abilities. None of those would make sense if the cards had the spelled-out equivalents rather than the actual keywords.



You're splitting hairs. Those additional abilities refer to actions taken, or triggers, not to keywords. They don't mention keywords 'cause they don't need to. The term "kicked," however, is clarified in as rule, and reads as a simplification of "whenever a players pays the kicker cost(s) of a spell," which is a perfectly legitimate and effective way to write the ability. Indeed, action words like "kicked" and such are designed for the mere purpose of shortening triggers, but they "mean" the full text as written in the Rules.

First strike, and trample, and haste, "mean" what their reminder text says. The reason reminder text doesn't qualify for identity just so happens to be for cards that have "examples" written in them. Extort is the first keyword that has a mana-color specific trigger, and this should force a rules clarification on what a keyword ACTUALLY means.

702.1. Most abilities describe exactly what they do in the card’s rules text. Some, though, are very common or would require too much space to define on the card. In these cases, the object lists only the name of the ability as a “keyword”; sometimes reminder text summarizes the game rule.

e.g.,

702.8a Flash is a static ability that functions in any zone from which you could play the card it’s on. “Flash” means “You may play this card any time you could cast an instant.”

If Flash had a color word in it, or a color mana symbol, it would be read as though the word is shorthand for the full ability, and the full ability would be referred to for specificity. This is precisely the situation that occurs with Progenitus's "Protection from everything":

702.15i “Protection from everything” is a variant of the protection ability. A permanent with protection from everything has protection from each object regardless of that object’s characteristic values. Such a permanent can’t be targeted by spells or abilities, enchanted by Auras, equipped by Equipment, fortified by Fortifications, or blocked by creatures, and all damage that would be dealt to it is prevented.

A double-nested example, to be sure, as "Protection" is a keyword that refers to a restriction of a subset of actions that cannot be used, while "from everything" doesn't qualify for the keyword's typical structure. "Protection from everything" cannot be broken down to mean any specific quality, it means "[CARDNAME] can’t be targeted by spells or abilities, enchanted by Auras, equipped by Equipment, fortified by Fortifications, or blocked by creatures, and all damage that would be dealt to it is prevented."

Edit:

Birds of Paradise and Command Tower both work in monogreen decks because "any color of mana" doesn't run afoul of the CI rules, which clarifies "The color identity of a card is the color or colors of any mana symbols in that card’s mana cost or rules text." The rules text, which ultimately points back to the document in hand, doesn't see a colored mana symbol or color word.
"Possibilities abound, too numerous to count." "Innocent, unbiased observation is a myth." --- P.B. Medawar (1969) "Ever since man first left his cave and met a stranger with a different language and a new way of looking at things, the human race has had a dream: to kill him, so we don't have to learn his language or his new way of looking at things." --- Zapp Brannigan (Beast With a Billion Backs)
Let me adjust my argument a tad (though I take the Mind Bend/Fear issue directly). This wording for extort wouldn't normally seem permittable, largely due to the unbroken rule of not placing costs in reminder text not in their rules texts.

There is no effective difference between

Extort (Whenever you cast a spell, you may pay {cost}. If you do, each opponent loses 1 life and you gain that much life.)

and

Extort (Whenever you cast a spell, you may pay . If you do, each opponent loses 1 life and you gain that much life.)

Except in the former, color identity restricts it; in the latter, no such case. This may have derived from MaRo's public desire for hybrid to be playble in any deck than can cast the card, regardless of its colors. Indeed, it seems to be a dodge around the CI rules WotC accepted when they started supporting the rules for EDH as "Commander," and MaRo, lead designer for Gatecrash during the time when the Orzhov keyword was developed, seems to have gotten his way.
"Possibilities abound, too numerous to count." "Innocent, unbiased observation is a myth." --- P.B. Medawar (1969) "Ever since man first left his cave and met a stranger with a different language and a new way of looking at things, the human race has had a dream: to kill him, so we don't have to learn his language or his new way of looking at things." --- Zapp Brannigan (Beast With a Billion Backs)
That makes no sense to me.

If they spelled the ability out on the card in full then it would not be allowed in a mono-black Commander deck, but because they used a keyword to save space it is allowed?

~ Tim   


Yup, just like you can have Birds of paradise in a mono green deck but not Noble Hierarch. YAY COLOR IDENTITY


Aww you used my favourite example as well. Sigged.

~ Tim 
I am Blue/White Reached DCI Rating 1800 on 28/10/11. :D
Sig
56287226 wrote:
190106923 wrote:
Not bad. But what happens flavor wise when one kamahl kills the other one?
Zis iz a sign uf deep psychological troma, buried in zer subconscious mind. By keelink himzelf, Kamahl iz physically expressink hiz feelinks uf self-disgust ova hiz desire for hiz muzzer. [/GermanPsychologistVoice]
56957928 wrote:
57799958 wrote:
That makes no sense to me. If they spelled the ability out on the card in full then it would not be allowed in a mono-black Commander deck, but because they used a keyword to save space it is allowed? ~ Tim
Yup, just like you can have Birds of paradise in a mono green deck but not Noble Hierarch. YAY COLOR IDENTITY
56287226 wrote:
56888618 wrote:
Is algebra really that difficult?
Survey says yes.
56883218 wrote:
57799958 wrote:
You want to make a milky drink. You squeeze a cow.
I love this description. Like the cows are sponges filled with milk. I can see it all Nick Parks claymation-style with the cow's eyes bugging out momentarily as a giant farmer squeezes it like a squeaky dog toy, and milk shoots out of it.
56287226 wrote:
56735468 wrote:
And no judge will ever give you a game loss for playing snow covered lands.
I now have a new goal in life. ;)
my favourite example is still Quenchable Fire

Noble Hierarch at least makes some kind of sense
proud member of the 2011 community team
my favourite example is still Quenchable Fire

Noble Hierarch at least makes some kind of sense


Quenchable Fire is also an excellent example.

Its not that the Hierarch being disallowed that doesnt make sense, what makes no sense is that BoP is allowed when the Hierarch isnt (even though it may as well say ": add , , , or to your mana pool").    

~ Tim 

I am Blue/White Reached DCI Rating 1800 on 28/10/11. :D
Sig
56287226 wrote:
190106923 wrote:
Not bad. But what happens flavor wise when one kamahl kills the other one?
Zis iz a sign uf deep psychological troma, buried in zer subconscious mind. By keelink himzelf, Kamahl iz physically expressink hiz feelinks uf self-disgust ova hiz desire for hiz muzzer. [/GermanPsychologistVoice]
56957928 wrote:
57799958 wrote:
That makes no sense to me. If they spelled the ability out on the card in full then it would not be allowed in a mono-black Commander deck, but because they used a keyword to save space it is allowed? ~ Tim
Yup, just like you can have Birds of paradise in a mono green deck but not Noble Hierarch. YAY COLOR IDENTITY
56287226 wrote:
56888618 wrote:
Is algebra really that difficult?
Survey says yes.
56883218 wrote:
57799958 wrote:
You want to make a milky drink. You squeeze a cow.
I love this description. Like the cows are sponges filled with milk. I can see it all Nick Parks claymation-style with the cow's eyes bugging out momentarily as a giant farmer squeezes it like a squeaky dog toy, and milk shoots out of it.
56287226 wrote:
56735468 wrote:
And no judge will ever give you a game loss for playing snow covered lands.
I now have a new goal in life. ;)
Mine is burnt offering because its Black and Red. The oracle wording added colored symbols, but no printed version exists.